I can login to a root shell on my machine (yes or no, or I don't know):
yes
I'm using a control panel to manage my site (no, or provide the name and version of the control panel):
No
My project is containerized along side caddy (version 2.2.1-alpine) and is orchestrated with docker swarm. It is running on a remote server from linode, using the docker app from the marketplace which runs debain 9. When I issue the docker deploy command, everything is working. However, inspecting the logs of caddy shows that it is not able to complete any of the challenges ([https://pastebin.com/eBHkn8DE](https://Link to full error log form docker service logs).
From inside of my remote server, I have tried to curl different letsencrypt urls and all of them are functional. From outside the server, I am able to see that both port 80 and 443 are open (When I am running my server) when I run nmap 172.105.179.254 or nmap mediacomune.com
Starting Nmap 7.80 ( https://nmap.org ) at 2020-11-13 12:03 AEDT
Nmap scan report for mediacomune.com (172.105.179.254)
Host is up (0.027s latency).
Not shown: 997 closed ports
PORT STATE SERVICE
22/tcp open ssh
80/tcp open http
443/tcp open https
So to me it seems that both ports are reachable from outside of the server and lets encrypt should be able to reach it. Lets debug results of my my domain name however, shows that AAAA and A are not working through either port.
When I checked my DNA and AAAA records on mxtoolbook it also showed the corrects ip address, so it seems that my A/AAAA records are functional. So I am lost as to why caddy cant issue the certificates. And why letsencrypt cant reach my sever.
Its probably just due to the fact that caddy is spun down. If you try again it should show both ports open.
And if it is due to me using a trusted network, what can I do to allow untrusted networks to access my sever. As ufw on my linode has default of allowing all incoming and outgoing.
Removing the AAAA records from linodes dns manager fixed the problem. Im curious though I let linode auto fill the ipv6 and added it to etc/hosts like the ipv4, so why would it cause issues?
The request and all future requests should be repeated using another URI. 307 and 308 parallel the behaviors of 302 and 301, but do not allow the HTTP method to change. So, for example, submitting a form to a permanently redirected resource may continue smoothly.